Board adds sexual orientation to Truman policy

Wednesday

Dec 12, 2012 at 3:00 PM

University's general counsel asserts sexual orientation was protected all along as student supporters hail decision as appropriate

Taylor Muller

The Truman State University Board of Governors amended its non-discrimination policy to explicitly lay out sexual orientation as a protected class despite insistence from its general counsel the protection has been in place for two decades.

Supporters of the measure hailed the 6-1 vote taken earlier this month at the board meeting in Kirksville as the necessary step to clarify the policy and ensure sexual orientation is protected for students, faculty and staff. Board member Cheryl Cozette cast the sole nay vote.

“It was not so much about trying to end widespread sexual discrimination at Truman, because we weren’t seeing that. It was about what we saw as conscious choice by the board to not want to mention sexual orientation when all other demographics were mentioned,” said Aaron Malin, president of Truman’s Student Association and Student Government.

Malin sponsored a measure that was unanimously approved by the Student Association in 2011 urging the Board of Governors to consider adding sexual orientation to its protections.

Previously, the board policy had been what the university’s general counsel referred to as a “non-traditional” policy.

“Folks came forward and said we want sexual orientation added and we didn’t need to do that, it was already there,” said Warren Wells, Truman’s general counsel. “But it became clear we needed to streamline the policy.”

The new policy states that the university does not discriminate based on “sex, disability, age, race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or veteran status.”

Wells referred to the board’s previous policy, which stated the university “recognizes the worth and dignity of all persons” and that it “does not discriminate on any basis not related to the applicable educational requirements of students or the applicable job requirements of employees,” as recently as January 1, 2012.

Wells also pointed to an expanded version of that official policy, found in a mid-2000s faculty handbook that goes beyond that wording to prohibit discriminatory practices based on reasons like “sexual orientation, veteran status, disability, marital status and bankruptcy.”

Wells highlighted that additional passage, which does explicitly protect sexual orientation, and said it was included in admissions applications and faculty and student handbooks as early as 1992.

But, he acknowledged that the new policy, which will be eventually posted on the board of governor’s website, is more straight forward and easier to understand.

“The source of confusion was it didn’t seem emphatic enough for some folks,” Wells said.

Malin applauded the board’s decision, but disputed that without the additional passage and explicit protection given to sexual orientation added to the official policy, the board had up until this point refrained from extending that protection.

“The issue we were presenting was why is it necessary to list all these other demographics, and all these others and that you can’t even mention [sexual orientation], you have to imply through a footnote. That sent a less than friendly message,” he said.

The new policy will be posted on the board’s website in the coming weeks. The university had already updated the policy on its website as of the Dec. 1 board meeting.